8 ms·

People Don't Understand NFTs

8 points by altrum 5y ago

Zaskoda 5y ago
NFTs or whatever we call them in the long run will probably be important. I started working on an Ethereum game dApp in 2017. My NFTs are actual assets in a game that also runs on-chain. By following the ERC721 standard, I don't have to build a marketplace for my game assets. Gamers can just use any marketplace they like. I'm also going to have an ERC20 token that is just the in-game currency. It doesn't have to be ERC20 but by following the standard, again, I get the benefit of being able to trade the currency using most wallets. We're definitely heading towards a new kind of ecosystem where the concept of tokens are going to play a huge role. But I think we're also still pretty early in the cycle of innovation. Exciting times imho.
- tdeck 5y ago
  That sounds like a user experience that's going to be pretty prohibitive for most consumers though. Only hardcore crypto enthusiasts who also want to play your game are going to be willing to set up a wallet and figure out how to trade your NFTs.
- seoulmetro 5y ago
  Sounds like when gaming companies said that micro-transactions and pay-to-win were exciting times because they allowed people with less time to still play as if they had wasted lots of time. Except here it sounds like just being able to be part of groups.
woodruffw 5y ago
> Finally, here’s where Gucci & Chanel differ from CryptoPunks — and one of the main ideas of why NFTs are revolutionary: you can’t fake it. Why not? This seems to be a popular sticking point in the NFT crowd, but it's never really been made clear to me. There seem to be oodles of duplicate NFTs out there (much less ones based on stolen art), so why can't I just make another?
- bejelentkezni 5y ago
  Because the picture of Calvin peeing isn't the NFT, the NFT is a cryptographically-secure blockchain that records ownership. They exist so that people can "own" the "real copy" of data that has no reason to be scarce. And like the article says, this worthless math is indeed mostly used for cash grabs and money laundering.
  - woodruffw 5y ago
    I know the picture of Calvin peeing isn't the "proof," it's just the public facing instrument. But this still isn't satisfying: anybody can put another transaction on that same blockchain (or a different one) with another proof of ownership. So which one is the real one?
    - rhizome 5y ago
      Fun fact: the entire NFT crypto system is powered by Walter Benjamin[1] spinning in his grave! 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Work_of_Art_in_the_Age_of_Mechanical_Reproduction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Work_of_Art_in_the_Age_of_...
    - altrum 5y ago
      Author here. Again, this is where "branding" comes in. Once people know which smart-contract is the real one, putting another transaction won't work. Sure, some people may fall for fakes and buy an NFT from a duplicate smart-contract, but this only happens due to the current lack of infrastructure in the ecosystem.
      - woodruffw 5y ago
        > Again, this is where "branding" comes in. Once people know which smart-contract is the real one, putting another transaction won't work. I'm sorry, but isn't this exactly the problem you pointed out with luxury goods in your own article? It's all about authenticity and provenance ("the real one"); you've just offloaded the proof from physical quality (which I or anybody else who's sufficiently informed can assess) to a proof of work or some other scheme without solving the actual problem (the bootstrapping of trust).
RattleyCooper 5y ago
Just bc people don't agree that a surprisingly shitty rendition of a pixel alien is worth $140,000,000, that doesn't mean they "don't understand NFTs", it just means their bullshit detector actually works.
- bejelentkezni 5y ago
  Well you see that's the whole idea, pixel alien isn't the NFT, the NFT is a cryptographically-secure blockchain that records ownership. They exist so that people can "own" the "real copy" of data that has no reason to be scarce. And like the article says, this worthless math is indeed mostly used for cash grabs and money laundering.
  - RattleyCooper 5y ago
    Yeah, I get that. You don't even own the thing at all, which makes it more of a ripoff. You essentially own a digital record that says that someone agrees that you paid money so that there is a record that you paid them money. As soon as 1 person issues a replacement NFT due to theft or something the entire idea comes crashing down bc now the "real copy" is actually "owned" by some thief and a new "real copy" is being created. From what I read a while back you kind of just have to trust that ppl won't sell the same "real copy" over and over again. This works fine in the real world of tangible goods but when people can be anonymous it's just begging for abuse.
  - oceanghost 5y ago
    That's a bit of nonsense there. You don't own the artwork, you own an URL pointing to the artwork which can change or stop working at any moment and likely isn't maintained by you.
- TearsInTheRain 5y ago
  I thought that going into the article but after reading it it provided some interesting analogies to luxury goods that expanded my perspective a bit.
tdeck 5y ago
> Imagine the U.S government started incorporating this global ledger to account for home ownership — automatically, they have a reputable brand. Since the code itself is out in public, it can be trusted and audited. Take this idea further and imagine the UN starts to keep track of land ownership for the entire world! Same deal — brand and trust, both satisfied. Where to even begin with this idea? First of all, many local governments in the U.S. already have public databases of who owns what land. This is a problem that can be solved with a SQLite database, it doesn't need a blockchain. Second, controlling access to individual pieces of land through ownership is a fundamental function of capitalist states. It's even more important than coining money. Why would a government delegate that to the UN? What would the benefit be? If a state can't effectively control access to land, that's an existential threat and not something the UN's "brand" can solve for you. The potential downsides are huge for everyone involved - sorting out disputed ownership or inheritance now requires a call to Brussels or Luxembourg? If this is supposed to be a reason why NFTs are useful rather than stupid, I still feel like I'm not getting it. That isn't to say there couldn't be valuable use cases out there.
- Zaskoda 5y ago
  > Where to even begin with this? First of all, many local governments in the U.S. already have public databases of who owns what land. This is a problem that can be solved with a SQLite database, it doesn't need a blockchain. I believe you're missing the opportunity that exists for automation. That database is heavily guarded by layers of human administration. I can't sell you my land without involving a bunch of humans who interpret contracts and push buttons. In a world where land ownership were recognized by tokens on a distributed ledger, buying and selling land no longer requires the overhead of all that administration.
  - gus_massa 5y ago
    Let's spouse I have two properties, one big and one small, and I sell you the small one for $X. But I miskick and send you the big one. If you don't want to return it to me, can I go to a judge? What about kidnaping? If someone kidnaps me and use a wrench to send my property, can it be returned?
xsmasher 5y ago
As far as I can tell the current artwork NFTs are just beanie babies or tulipmania; they're valuable because the buyer thinks they have a resale value. I suppose some minority may buy them just for bragging rights, a la "I am Rich" or that wutang album.
emerged 5y ago
I’m considering a spin-off of NFTs which cryptographically proves that you dont own a link to a real or virtual object. Of course it won’t prove whether or not you do own the real or virtual object, but that’s a tired old argument by people who don’t “get” the technological advancement.
mjevans 5y ago
blockchain "baseball cards" is the best quick description I have for NFTs. It makes less sense than that to me though. Isn't an NFT just, within a specific blockchain, claiming to 'own' or control a bit of datastream? Like a photo, or video, or object model. Except this isn't even insanity normally practiced like copyright or patents; you don't get any of those artificial 'land grab' rights. Just your name attached to the thing within that blockchain?
- altrum 5y ago
  I think "baseball cards" is a limited view of the NFT model, which is what's being argued in this article; it's essentially a programmable, global database. Just like how we trust certain government records to be accurate & representative of ownership, each chain, if secure, can achieve the same functionality in a more open and decentralized way (also its inherently global, which can have huge implications wrt globalization)
  - dragonwriter 5y ago
    > I think "baseball cards" is a limited view of the NFT model, which is what's being argued in this article; it's essentially a programmable, global database. NFTs are built on a preexisting global programmable database, but are specifically a use of that database to create digital baseball cards.

8 points by altrum 5y ago

NFTs or whatever we call them in the long run will probably be important. I started working on an Ethereum game dApp in 2017. My NFTs are actual assets in a game that also runs on-chain. By following the ERC721 standard, I don't have to build a marketplace for my game assets. Gamers can just use any marketplace they like. I'm also going to have an ERC20 token that is just the in-game currency. It doesn't have to be ERC20 but by following the standard, again, I get the benefit of being able to trade the currency using most wallets. We're definitely heading towards a new kind of ecosystem where the concept of tokens are going to play a huge role. But I think we're also still pretty early in the cycle of innovation. Exciting times imho.

tdeck 5y ago
That sounds like a user experience that's going to be pretty prohibitive for most consumers though. Only hardcore crypto enthusiasts who also want to play your game are going to be willing to set up a wallet and figure out how to trade your NFTs.
seoulmetro 5y ago
Sounds like when gaming companies said that micro-transactions and pay-to-win were exciting times because they allowed people with less time to still play as if they had wasted lots of time. Except here it sounds like just being able to be part of groups.

woodruffw 5y ago

> Finally, here’s where Gucci & Chanel differ from CryptoPunks — and one of the main ideas of why NFTs are revolutionary: you can’t fake it. Why not? This seems to be a popular sticking point in the NFT crowd, but it's never really been made clear to me. There seem to be oodles of duplicate NFTs out there (much less ones based on stolen art), so why can't I just make another?

bejelentkezni 5y ago
Because the picture of Calvin peeing isn't the NFT, the NFT is a cryptographically-secure blockchain that records ownership. They exist so that people can "own" the "real copy" of data that has no reason to be scarce. And like the article says, this worthless math is indeed mostly used for cash grabs and money laundering.
- woodruffw 5y ago
  I know the picture of Calvin peeing isn't the "proof," it's just the public facing instrument. But this still isn't satisfying: anybody can put another transaction on that same blockchain (or a different one) with another proof of ownership. So which one is the real one?
  - rhizome 5y ago
    Fun fact: the entire NFT crypto system is powered by Walter Benjamin[1] spinning in his grave! 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Work_of_Art_in_the_Age_of_Mechanical_Reproduction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Work_of_Art_in_the_Age_of_...
  - altrum 5y ago
    Author here. Again, this is where "branding" comes in. Once people know which smart-contract is the real one, putting another transaction won't work. Sure, some people may fall for fakes and buy an NFT from a duplicate smart-contract, but this only happens due to the current lack of infrastructure in the ecosystem.
    - woodruffw 5y ago
      > Again, this is where "branding" comes in. Once people know which smart-contract is the real one, putting another transaction won't work. I'm sorry, but isn't this exactly the problem you pointed out with luxury goods in your own article? It's all about authenticity and provenance ("the real one"); you've just offloaded the proof from physical quality (which I or anybody else who's sufficiently informed can assess) to a proof of work or some other scheme without solving the actual problem (the bootstrapping of trust).

RattleyCooper 5y ago

Just bc people don't agree that a surprisingly shitty rendition of a pixel alien is worth $140,000,000, that doesn't mean they "don't understand NFTs", it just means their bullshit detector actually works.

bejelentkezni 5y ago
Well you see that's the whole idea, pixel alien isn't the NFT, the NFT is a cryptographically-secure blockchain that records ownership. They exist so that people can "own" the "real copy" of data that has no reason to be scarce. And like the article says, this worthless math is indeed mostly used for cash grabs and money laundering.
- RattleyCooper 5y ago
  Yeah, I get that. You don't even own the thing at all, which makes it more of a ripoff. You essentially own a digital record that says that someone agrees that you paid money so that there is a record that you paid them money. As soon as 1 person issues a replacement NFT due to theft or something the entire idea comes crashing down bc now the "real copy" is actually "owned" by some thief and a new "real copy" is being created. From what I read a while back you kind of just have to trust that ppl won't sell the same "real copy" over and over again. This works fine in the real world of tangible goods but when people can be anonymous it's just begging for abuse.
- oceanghost 5y ago
  That's a bit of nonsense there. You don't own the artwork, you own an URL pointing to the artwork which can change or stop working at any moment and likely isn't maintained by you.
TearsInTheRain 5y ago
I thought that going into the article but after reading it it provided some interesting analogies to luxury goods that expanded my perspective a bit.

tdeck 5y ago

> Imagine the U.S government started incorporating this global ledger to account for home ownership — automatically, they have a reputable brand. Since the code itself is out in public, it can be trusted and audited. Take this idea further and imagine the UN starts to keep track of land ownership for the entire world! Same deal — brand and trust, both satisfied. Where to even begin with this idea? First of all, many local governments in the U.S. already have public databases of who owns what land. This is a problem that can be solved with a SQLite database, it doesn't need a blockchain. Second, controlling access to individual pieces of land through ownership is a fundamental function of capitalist states. It's even more important than coining money. Why would a government delegate that to the UN? What would the benefit be? If a state can't effectively control access to land, that's an existential threat and not something the UN's "brand" can solve for you. The potential downsides are huge for everyone involved - sorting out disputed ownership or inheritance now requires a call to Brussels or Luxembourg? If this is supposed to be a reason why NFTs are useful rather than stupid, I still feel like I'm not getting it. That isn't to say there couldn't be valuable use cases out there.

Zaskoda 5y ago
> Where to even begin with this? First of all, many local governments in the U.S. already have public databases of who owns what land. This is a problem that can be solved with a SQLite database, it doesn't need a blockchain. I believe you're missing the opportunity that exists for automation. That database is heavily guarded by layers of human administration. I can't sell you my land without involving a bunch of humans who interpret contracts and push buttons. In a world where land ownership were recognized by tokens on a distributed ledger, buying and selling land no longer requires the overhead of all that administration.
- gus_massa 5y ago
  Let's spouse I have two properties, one big and one small, and I sell you the small one for $X. But I miskick and send you the big one. If you don't want to return it to me, can I go to a judge? What about kidnaping? If someone kidnaps me and use a wrench to send my property, can it be returned?

xsmasher 5y ago

As far as I can tell the current artwork NFTs are just beanie babies or tulipmania; they're valuable because the buyer thinks they have a resale value. I suppose some minority may buy them just for bragging rights, a la "I am Rich" or that wutang album.

emerged 5y ago

I’m considering a spin-off of NFTs which cryptographically proves that you dont own a link to a real or virtual object. Of course it won’t prove whether or not you do own the real or virtual object, but that’s a tired old argument by people who don’t “get” the technological advancement.

mjevans 5y ago

blockchain "baseball cards" is the best quick description I have for NFTs. It makes less sense than that to me though. Isn't an NFT just, within a specific blockchain, claiming to 'own' or control a bit of datastream? Like a photo, or video, or object model. Except this isn't even insanity normally practiced like copyright or patents; you don't get any of those artificial 'land grab' rights. Just your name attached to the thing within that blockchain?

altrum 5y ago
I think "baseball cards" is a limited view of the NFT model, which is what's being argued in this article; it's essentially a programmable, global database. Just like how we trust certain government records to be accurate & representative of ownership, each chain, if secure, can achieve the same functionality in a more open and decentralized way (also its inherently global, which can have huge implications wrt globalization)
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > I think "baseball cards" is a limited view of the NFT model, which is what's being argued in this article; it's essentially a programmable, global database. NFTs are built on a preexisting global programmable database, but are specifically a use of that database to create digital baseball cards.